TL:DR summary: Scientific results are highly contingent on subjective decisions at the analysis stage. Different (well-founded) data analysis techniques on a fairly simple and well-defined problem can give radically different results.
It's very interesting research -- a great real-life example supporting the models Scott Page et. al. use for the value of cognitive diversity. The thrust of the blog post is about where crowdsourcing analysis can be helpful (as well as reasonable caveats about where it might not apply), which is certainly an interesting question. Obvioulsy, there are a lot of other implications to this as well.
That clearly wasn't the case here, so I was wondering why the author choose to use it. I realize that meaning has changed over time, but I was wondering what meaning he (and others) intend when it is used.
Example:
poster1: only retards use vi, notepad rules
poster2: huge list of reasons why vi is better than notepad
poster1: lol tldr
We already have terms like "summary", "digest", and even "précis"; why create a new term imbued with snark?
But not always. You have to consider how it was used to tell whether it was meant with ill will, the term tl;dr on its own doesn't necessarily tell you enough.
By now, it often is used to be friendly. There's a subconscious acknowledgement that long words take people's time. The speaker can even be talking about his own work and tell everyone "tldr version: " at the top.
Google uses it a lot in their own docs: https://developers.google.com/s/results/?q=tldr
You can also choose to pronounce it "teal deer" and use images of a green deer animal to signify the same.
...
In some situations, if you want, you can say it to be mean.